Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook’s tracking of non-users ruled illegal again in Europe

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 395 posts

Re: Facebook’s tracking of non-users ruled illegal again in Europe

#191

Post by zaarn »

TomMarius wrote: post #134
mziel wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're supposed to enumerate all uses of the data (and they need to be sufficiently detailed and specific). The user has a choice to opt-in/out of each of them separately. There is currently no detailed description as to what the definition of "sufficiently" is. For example: - can I use your data to build a targeting machine learning model? - can I use it to target you? - do I need specific opt-in for every model? Mo…

Defend it? What happened with "innocent until proven guilty"?

The GDPR does somewhat turn handling private data into "guilty until proven innocent".

Until you prove otherwise, by means of contract, legitimate business interest, law or consent, assume private data is meant to remain private.

Re: Facebook’s tracking of non-users ruled illegal again in Europe

#192

Post by gsich »

EggsOnToast wrote: post #181
paulie_a wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet existed before ads, people created content and hosted websites without invasive tracking. And let's be honest, most ads are total garbage.

I remember the 90s internet. It was a neat place but I wouldn't call it very useful by modern standards.

usefulness today is not because of ads.

Re: Facebook’s tracking of non-users ruled illegal again in Europe

#193

Post by eeZah7Ux »

Ftuuky wrote: post #142
TomMarius wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what you mean by EU, but most of EU countries except for the west are more corrupt than the US. EDIT: Downvotes? I'm stating facts. How can you downvote facts?

Correct. On average, EU and US have about the same corruption, at least according to the Corruption Index 2017 [0] [0] https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_percept...

I wonder if the index treats lobbying and donation millions to support elections as corruption.

Such activities are illegal and considered corruption in most countries.

Re: Facebook’s tracking of non-users ruled illegal again in Europe

#194

Post by madez »

pjc50 wrote: post #165
dalbasal wrote: post #122

Two kind of related points. The jurisdiction stuff is disturbing. Having separate rules/rulings for Belgium, Turkey, Venezuela, etc... It's (a) not practical and will end up helping incumbents .(b) It really curbs the internet's ability to promote an open information norm. Privacy is an issue and we need to do something about it. But, I have a real feeling cencorship, corporate-protectionism, copyright and other agen…

As I've said before, ultimately we have to pick one: - single Internet jurisdiction, overriding national sovereignty; in practice this means letting America run the Internet - National Internet jurisdictions, which potentially come with some sort of virtual border policing; Great Firewall(s) - lawlessness, which libertarians will like but produces outcomes increasingly unacceptable to the public

If we put things into a historic context, then national internet jurisdiction is what will happen.

Re: Facebook’s tracking of non-users ruled illegal again in Europe

#195

Post by tobylane »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #47
rb666 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a matter of priorities as well. There's hardly funding to prosecute everyone that breaks any sort of law. So you aim for the big fish. Many more are "hurt" by FB's practices than some random other small player. In that sense, FB is committing the larger crime.

Picking the large foreign company is always an easy target, it can easily lead to protectionism: enforce laws on the outsiders but not the insiders. China is an extreme case of this: foreign companies must walk on egg shells while domestic companies are able to easily break laws now and ask for forgiveness later if the party decides to crackdown.

They are targeting companies from personal data protection-weak jurisdictions who want EU customers.

To use your example, US has targeted companies from IP-protection-weak countries. Was it directly targeting China? I'd say not necessarily.

Re: Facebook’s tracking of non-users ruled illegal again in Europe

#197

Post by 2aa07e2 »

My question is, will I be able to use gmail without my google searches being tracked? Google did a great job to "bundle" its ToS into a single generic agreement for all the services under that "Your Google account" umbrella. I would love to opt out of that agreement, retroactively, and still be able to use gmail.

Re: Facebook’s tracking of non-users ruled illegal again in Europe

#198

Post by dalbasal »

seszett wrote: post #160
dalbasal wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but they're swimming in disingenuous waters. Surely, they can't run 100 versions of the site to suit 100 legislative/court systems. Well, maybe Facebook can. Can tinder? What about the next Facebook?

> What about the next Facebook? Maybe there can be no next Facebook (as in, one multinational actor is position of monopoly on one type of service) and maybe that's not a bad thing. If the only way to have the same kind of service from now one is to use a network of separate entities each smaller than Facebook and interoperating between themselves, it might be a good side effect of the law.

If so, that's not a bad result.

What I fear is that there is no next FB because fewer people can "enter the market" that in this case is necessarily international .. can't because you need to start with a team of lawyers and compliance officers.

FB is unlikely to get injured. They're big and rich and have a deep moat. It would take a lot to shave 5% off its revenue. Making a potential FB competitor restrict itself to a smaller market, and a more localized service... It doesn't take as much.

Post reply on HN